Paul O’Sullivan Under Fire After Alleged Threat to Cedrick Nkabinde During Parliamentary Inquiry

“We Won’t Be Intimidated”: Parliament Erupts After Paul O’Sullivan’s Alleged Threat to Cedrick Nkabinde

The inquiry into police misconduct takes a dramatic turn and sparks a political storm

A Quiet Hearing Turns Explosive

What was meant to be a routine day of testimony in Parliament turned into a moment of high drama when Cedrick Nkabinde, the suspended chief of staff to Police Minister Senzo Mchunu, took his seat after a short break and calmly announced that he had just received a threatening message.

The alleged sender?
Well-known forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan.

In a room already thick with factional tension, the inquiry into allegations involving KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi suddenly felt less like parliamentary oversight and more like the opening act of a political thriller.

And South Africans watching the proceedings online reacted in real time with disbelief, outrage, and a fair amount of “only in SA” humour.

“Get Ready, You Lying Crook…”: The Message That Sparked a Firestorm

Nkabinde, visibly unsettled but determined, asked the committee for permission to place the message on record.
He then read it aloud:

“Get ready, you lying crook. I am going to make sure you spend some years in prison. You were bribed by Mkhwanazi and Mapula.”

The message went further, warning him that he would “pay for his crimes.”

What stunned the room was not just the tone it was the timing.
O’Sullivan is one of the people expected to testify at this very inquiry. Several witnesses had already mentioned his name. Yet here he was, allegedly sending a threat to someone testifying under oath.

If true, the act would be more than reckless. It would be illegal.

South Africa’s Powers, Privileges and Immunities Act makes it a serious offence to intimidate a parliamentary witness. Anyone found guilty could face a fine or even up to two years in prison.

Suddenly, the inquiry had two items on its agenda: the original allegations and the new fire O’Sullivan may have lit under himself.

MPs Across Parties Unite, In Outrage

Parliament is rarely a place of unanimous emotion, but on Wednesday, MPs from nearly every political corner sang the same tune:
This crosses a line.

MK Party: “He Must Come Here Immediately.”

MK Party MP Sibonelo Nomvalo didn’t hold back.
He said South Africa had heard enough stories of O’Sullivan “intimidating people” and insisted he face the committee as a matter of urgency.

ANC: “We Must Protect Our Witnesses.”

ANC MP Xola Nqola reminded everyone that Parliament has a constitutional responsibility to safeguard those who testify.
“We are not going to tolerate any form of intimidation,” he said, setting a serious tone.

EFF: “This Is Not the First Time.”

EFF MP Leigh-Ann Mathys brought historical receipts.
She recalled that O’Sullivan allegedly sent a similar threatening message to MPs in the Police Portfolio Committee back in 2018.
“It’s becoming a pattern,” she warned. “A strong message must be sent.”

Patriotic Alliance: “Screenshot That Message.”

PA MP Ashley Sauls advised Nkabinde to take screenshots immediately a very 2025 South African touch and called on Parliament to show its authority.

MK Party Again: “We Will Open a Criminal Case.”

David Skosana took it even further.
“We cannot have a thug intimidate parliamentarians,” he said.
“South Africa must not become a banana republic or a mafia state.”

Online Reaction: South Africans Are… Predictably Blunt

As news of the message spread, social media lit up.
South Africans joked, analysed, and raged, sometimes in the same thread.

A sampling of the online vibes:

• “Paul O’Sullivan texting threats during a hearing? The confidence is wild.”

• “You can’t WhatsApp-threaten Parliament and expect vibes only.”

• “This inquiry is turning into Netflix. Someone please pass the popcorn.”

Beneath the humour, though, was a serious question:
If witnesses feel threatened, can Parliament still function independently?

A Long History of Tension Around O’Sullivan

For those unfamiliar with him, Paul O’Sullivan is not a newcomer to controversy.
He’s built a career as a forensic investigator who often targets alleged corruption in high-profile circles.

He’s earned both admiration and criticism, depending on who is telling the story.
Supporters call him fearless.
Critics call him reckless.

This latest incident may shape his legacy more than he expects.

Committee Moves To Protect Nkabinde

Chairperson Soviet Lekganyane stepped in to calm the waters, assuring Nkabinde and the public that Parliament’s legal team would handle the matter.

“We will ensure your rights as a citizen are protected,” he promised, adding that legal advisers would guide the next steps.

Behind the scenes, parliamentary lawyers are now weighing whether O’Sullivan should face charges for obstruction, intimidation, or violations of parliamentary privilege.

If Parliament follows through, this could open a legal battle far bigger than the inquiry itself.

A Moment That Could Redefine the Inquiry

What began as an investigation into alleged misconduct within the police has now widened into a test of South Africa’s democratic muscle.

If witnesses can be threatened, allegedly by someone expected to testify, what message does that send to the public?

For once, Parliament seems united:
They won’t let intimidation derail the process.

But with O’Sullivan still expected to appear before the committee, the next chapters of this story might be even more dramatic.

Stay tuned.

{Source: IOL}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com